biodiversity strategy and action plan.
Summary of target achievement
By the December 2015 deadline established in this target, 69 Parties had submitted an NBSAP prepared, revised or updated after the adoption of the Strategic Plan. An additional 101 Parties have since submitted their NBSAP, so that by July 2020, 170 Parties had developed NBSAPs in line with the Strategic Plan. This represents 85% of the Parties to the Convention. However, the extent to which these NBSAPs have been adopted as policy instruments and are being implemented in an effective and participatory manner, is variable. The target has been partially achieved (high confidence).1 National biodiversity strategies and action plans
(NBSAPs) are the principal policy instrument for the implementation of the Convention at the national level. The majority of Parties have gone through a process to align their NBSAPs with the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020. This represents a significant effort of Parties to apply
the Strategic Plan to national circumstances, and to support implementation of the Convention.
However, for many Parties, the time lag between the adoption of the Strategic Plan and the devel-opment of updated NBSAPs likely delayed actions for achievement of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets (Figure 17.1). To support Parties in updating their Figure 17.1. Extent and timing of submission of national biodiversity strategies and action plans2
0
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Number of submissions per month Total number of submissions Proportion of Parties with NBSAPs
NBSAPS developed, revised or updated following the adoption of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 (87%) NBSAP submitted before the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 (11%) No NBSAP (3%)
The pie chart illustrates the proportion of Parties that have developed, revised or updated an NBSAP before and after the adoption of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020. The trend line shows the cumulative number of NBSAPs prepared, revised or updated after the adoption of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020. The bars illustrate the number of such NBSAPs submitted in a given month.
Target 17
Strategic Goal E: Target 17 – Biodiversity strategies and action plans 109 TARGET ELEMENTS
1. Submission of NBSAPs by 2015 2. Effective policy instruments 3. NBSAPs are being implemented
NBSAPs and aligning them the Strategic Plan a series of regional and sub-regional workshops were held, supported by the Japan Biodiversity Fund.
Through the Fund and other sources, subsequent capacity building activities supported implemen-tation of NBSAPs.4
Actions to reach this target frequently reported in national reports include undertaking mainstreaming activities to support NBSAP imple-mentation, including workshops, inter-agency cooperation and aligning work on other sectoral strategies and action plans (Box 17.1). Some Parties also referred to initiating regional and provincial level biodiversity plans to more effectively translate the NBSAPs into local action (Box 17.2). Commonly reported challenges to reaching this target were
the lack of indicators to monitor the use of the NBSAP as a policy instrument, limited resources to implement NBSAPs, and the fact that many NBSAPs were only recently adopted.
Several additional challenges related to the development, revision or update of NBSAPs remain.
The number of Parties that have adopted their NBSAPs as policy instruments is limited. Only 69 NBSAPs have been adopted as whole-of-government instruments and another eight have been adopted as instruments applying to the environmental sector.
Few of the revised NBSAPs contain resource mobil-ization strategies (25 Parties), communication and public awareness strategies (38 Parties), capacity development strategies (97 Parties) or reflect gender considerations (76 Parties) (Box 17.3). In
2
1 3
Box 17.1. Examples of country experiences and national progress3
ɠ Federated States of Micronesia: A highly consultative programme was used to develop the country’s NBSAP, involving representatives from the national, state and municipal levels, the United Nations Development Programme, non-governmental organizations, community-based organizations, women’s groups as well as the science and education communities. The themes identified in the NBSAP have been mapped to relevant Aichi Biodiversity Targets and the Sustainable Development Goals. Climate change and gender are recognized as specific themes underpinning the entire NBSAP.
ɠ Panama: The country’s NBSAP will be used as an instrument for mainstreaming biodiversity in relevant policies and strategies. Its 2050 vision is to achieve ‘Un Panamá Verde’ (‘A Green Panama’) and enhance well-being for all Panamanians. The vision is underpinned by a paradigm shift towards a development model that combines the three dimensions—social, economic and environmental—of sustainable development.
ɠ South Sudan: One of the principles of the country’s NBSAP is that biodiversity management will purposely contribute to poverty reduction and economic development. There is a specific target in the NBSAP related to the mainstreaming of biodiversity values in national development plans and budget framework papers, as well as in state and county development plans. In addition, there is another target calling on the national and state governments to review relevant legislation, policies and programs to maximize synergies with the NBSAP.
Status
RELEVANT SDG TARGET
addition, few NBSAPs address the mainstreaming of biodiversity into cross-sectoral plans and policies, poverty eradication policies, or into sustainable development plans. However, most Parties also report that different government ministries and departments have been involved in the development of their NBSAP. The government ministries that were most commonly involved were agriculture, fisheries, forestry, development or planning, tourism, education, finance, trade, industry, infrastructure and transport. Many Parties have also indicated that indigenous peoples and local communities (40 Parties), non-governmental organisations and civil society (100 Parties), the private sector (51 Parties) and academia (70 Parties) have been involved in the preparation of their NBSAP.6
Significant efforts have been made to translate the Aichi Biodiversity Targets into national commitments and the majority of NBSAPs incor-porate targets related to the global targets. Aichi Biodiversity Targets 1, 9, 16, 17, 19 and 20 are most widely reflected in NBSAPs with broadly similar
national targets or commitments, while Targets 3, 6, 10 and 14 are the least reflected. Overall, the national targets contained in the NBSAPs tend to be less ambitious than the corresponding Aichi Targets or have a narrower scope. Therefore national targets, in aggregate, are not commensurate with the level of ambition set out in the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020.7
More than half (54%) of the NBSAPs contain targets related to Aichi Biodiversity Target 17 and of these about a third (36%) are similar to the scope and level of ambition set out in Aichi Target 17.
More than half of Parties report that they are on track to reach (42%) or exceed (13%) their national targets associated with the Aichi Target and many others (36%) have made progress towards them but not at a rate that will allow them to be met.
Few Parties (9%) report that they are making no progress towards the target. Fewer than a third (28%) of Parties have national targets similar to Aichi Biodiversity Target 17 and are on track to meet them. (see bar chart).8
Target 15.9: By 2020, integrate ecosystem and biodiversity values into national and local planning, development processes, poverty reduction strategies and accounts
Box 17.2. Examples of subnational planning processes
While NBSAPs are national instruments, many Parties5 have reported that sub-national authorities, such as states, provinces and cities have also developed biodiversity strategies. Examples of these include:
ɠ Canada: The provinces of Ontario, New Brunswick and Quebec, the Northwest Territories, the cities of Edmonton and Montreal, as well as the Fraser Valley Region of the province of British Columbia, have all developed biodiversity strategies and action plans.
ɠ China: By May 2016, 18 provinces had completed and released provincial biodiversity conservation strategies and action plans.
ɠ Republic of Korea: Nine sub-national governments have established regional biodiversity strategies, and eight have produced action plans for conservation or wildlife protection.
ɠ Mexico: Seventeen states, as well as Mexico City, have developed biodiversity strategies.
111 Strategic Goal E: Target 17 – Biodiversity strategies and action plans
Rafal Cichawa/Shutterstock
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
The colour bars show the percentage of Parties reporting a given level of progress towards their national targets. (Blue: exceeds target; Green: on track; Yellow: some progress; Red: no change;
Purple: moving away from target). The intensity of the colour indicates alignment of national targets with the Aichi Target (Darker colours indicate close alignment).
Assessment of progress towards national targets
Box 17.3. Gender and the NBSAPs
Mainstreaming gender in NBSAPs is an objective of the Convention’s 2015-2020 Gender Plan of Action, and a number of Parties have included specific activities on gender in their NBSAPs. For example, Eritrea has identified the National Union of Eritrean Women to be responsible for mobilizing women to participate in biodiversity planning and implementation, building on the Union’s role in mobilizing local communities in programmes and projects related to natural resources management and sustainable development. Liberia has allocated $500,000 to micro-credit projects to support women’s empowerment in the budget for its NBSAP.9 However, despite such positive examples, reviews have found that only about half of NBSAPs contain references to gender and women. This represents a missed opportunity to integrate gender into biodiversity policy.10 Recommended actions to better reflect gender in NBSAPs include: collecting and applying sex-disaggregated data; ensuring equitable participation; enhancing women’s agency and leadership; ensuring equal access to, control over and benefits from biological resources; building awareness and capacity; and ensuring adequate resources for gender-responsive biodiversity initiatives.